The STATE of the JUDICIARY in Texas

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

The STATE of the JUDICIARY in Texas The STATE OF THE JUDICIARY in Texas Chief Justice Wallace B. Jefferson Presented to the 79th Legislature February 23, 2005 Austin, Texas THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS WALLACE B. JEFFERSON Justices Chief Justice NATHAN L. HECHT PRISCILLA R. OWEN HARRIET O’NEILL DALE WAINWRIGHT SCOTT A. BRISTER DAVID M. MEDINA PAUL W. GREEN THE TEXAS COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS SHARON KELLER Judges Presiding Judge LAWRENCE E. MEYERS TOM PRICE PAUL WOMACK CHERYL JOHNSON MIKE KEASLER BARBARA P. HERVEY CHARLES R. HOLCOMB CATHY COCHRAN Chief Justice Wallace B. Jefferson STATE OF THE JUDICIARY Presented to the 79th Legislature February 23, 2005 Austin, Texas GOVERNOR PERRY, LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR DEWHURST, SPEAKER CRADDICK, DISTINGUISHED MEMBERS OF THE SENATE AND THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN: I am honored to appear before you for my inaugural “State of the Judiciary” address, one of the unique privileges afforded to me as Chief Justice. As you know, I was appointed by Governor Rick Perry to fill the vacancy left when Chief Justice Tom Phillips retired. Tom Phillips devoted his life to the Court, and to the judiciary, and has received much-deserved praise for his service to Texas. I am sure I have the authority to order yet another plaque for this giant Texan. I choose instead to honor his example by speaking passionately about how the judiciary can best meet its responsibility to the people of Texas, to litigants in our courts, and to all who expect our halls of justice to be fair and impartial. The state of our judiciary is strong; made strong by those, like Chief Justice Phillips, who have dedicated their lives to the great public enterprise of preserving our state and national constitutions and to protecting and defending laws that ensure we remain a government of the people. Some would say that the judiciary, lacking the power of the purse or the means of enforcement, is the weakest governmental branch. I disagree, because our legislature understands that a law construed erroneously threatens lawmaking. Our governor knows that an edict ignored is lawlessness. And I need not remind this audience, who knows of the Treaty Oak, that a weak branch often signals trouble in the roots. Judicial Compensation While strong, the judiciary currently faces a challenge that calls for legislative and executive action. The challenge is to fund the judiciary at a level sufficient to retain our most capable and experienced judges. Texas is losing judges at all levels of the judiciary due, at least in part, to salaries that have not kept pace with the times. Ask Judge Harvey Brown, Justice Murry Cohen, and my former colleague Craig Enoch if inadequate compensation played a role in their departures from the bench. And let us admit to ourselves that the judiciary suffers from the loss of their expertise, integrity and experience. Teddy Roosevelt once said: “It is not befitting the dignity of the nation that its most honored public servants should be paid sums so small compared to what they would earn in private life that the performance of public service by them implies an exceedingly heavy pecuniary sacrifice.”1 Those words are as true today as they were in 1908. Texans deserve to walk into a Texas courtroom knowing that their cases will be heard by women and men of talent and experience, judges who have been recruited from among the most capable and successful lawyers. I want all Texans in every area of the state, and all litigants from outside the state who are properly before Texas courts, to have access to a judiciary that includes the most capable, the most dedicated, and the most knowledgeable and experienced. All too often, our brightest and most experienced judges are leaving the bench, moving on to other opportunities outside the judiciary. It is no secret that judges double or triple their salaries by returning to the private sector. Even judges who choose some other form of public service – those who teach in our public law schools or who are honored with an appointment to the federal bench – increase their salary by 40% or more. Our most distinguished jurists accept the call to judicial service not for monetary compensation but out of devotion to the rule of law. Judges in our state willingly accept a degree of personal financial sacrifice in exchange for that privilege. But if we ask judges to sacrifice too much, Texas will be left without the experienced judiciary that it surely deserves. Today, we are asking too much. I have not been alone in noting the emergence of a developing trend. Our most experienced judges are leaving the bench, replaced by others who, although dedicated and intelligent, are not equipped to handle those cases as efficiently as their experienced predecessors. Of course, we benefit from the recruitment of new judges, who add energy and innovation to the judiciary, but a large-scale replacement leads inevitably to uncertainty and inefficiency. A transitory judiciary is inevitable (I am sad to say) if a judge can serve only as long as his or her savings permit. We do not want a judiciary in which judges serve with a view toward how their rulings will advance or detract from resumes they prepare in contemplation of a short tenure in office. This, I think, is what is meant by judicial independence – the conviction to rule courageously without regard to such personal considerations. Today, the salary of our state judges is less than even that of a first-year associate at a large firm and pales in comparison with other states: In the 1980s, Texas ranked 5th among the 50 states for judicial compensation at the courts of last resort. Today, Texas ranks 39th. Texas’s intermediate court salaries rank 34th, and trial court salaries rank 28th. An inexperienced judiciary takes a toll on the citizens of the state: it delays justice by prolonging child custody decisions, slowing criminal trials, and necessitating new trials. 1 Eighth Annual Message, December 8, 1908. It also takes an economic toll: business leaders have reported, in survey after survey, that they are more likely to invest in states whose courts can offer judicial efficiency and consistency. In 2004, for example, a United States Chamber of Commerce national survey listed business leaders’ top concerns about the legal environment.2 They were most concerned about punitive damages, an area recently addressed by the Texas Legislature. Close behind, however, were concerns about “judicial competence” and “timeliness of decisions.” These issues even outranked concerns about workers’ compensation, product liability, and reform of the jury system. Because businesses invest in states with a strong judiciary, state support of the judiciary is an economically sound decision even in these days of tight budgets. A study performed by the Perryman Group, an economic research firm, reports that a relatively modest investment in judicial salaries will more than pay for itself through increased business activity and increased state revenues. The goal of an efficient, effective judiciary was recognized from the earliest days of our Nation and of our beloved Texas. Indeed, in his message to the Sixth Congress of the Republic of Texas, President Sam Houston said: “To maintain an able, honest, and enlightened judiciary should be the first object of every people.” The framers of the United States Constitution also understood the importance of an efficient, experienced judiciary; they wrote into the Constitution a provision forbidding any reduction in federal judges’ salaries.3 Early on, the United States Supreme Court recognized that this constitutional provision was enacted, in its words, “not to benefit the judges, but . to attract good and competent [judges] to the bench and to promote that independence of action and judgment which is essential to the maintenance of the guaranties, limitations and pervading principles of the Constitution and to the administration of justice without respect to persons and with equal concern for the poor and the rich.”4 John Marshall, a Revolutionary War hero and former Chief Justice of the United States, aptly noted that “[t]he Judicial Department comes home in its effects to every man’s fireside; it passes on his property, his reputation, his life, his all.”5 Two centuries later, the statement still rings true: the judiciary handles child custody cases, criminal prosecutions, contract matters, and much more. There is not a citizen in Texas whose life has not, in some way, been touched by the judicial system. I must pause here to recognize the progress on judicial compensation made during this legislative session. In fact, even before the session began, and before my appointment as Chief, Governor Perry expressed his concern that the current compensation structure for judges impedes his ability to recruit men and women of obvious merit when vacancies arise. The Governor’s concern has recently been reflected in his proposed state budget, 2 2004 U.S. Chamber of Commerce State Liability Systems Ranking Study, March 3, 2004, available at http://www.instituteforlegalreform.org/pdfs/2004%20full%20report.pdf. 3 U.S. CONST. art III, Sec. 1. 4 O'Donoghue v. United States, 289 U.S. 516, 533 (1933) 5 Id. (quoting DEBATES OF THE VIRGINIA STATE CONVENTION OF 1829-1830, pp. 616, 619) which urges restoration of adequate funding for appellate courts and an increase in judicial compensation “to maintain the quality of our judicial system” and “to attract and retain qualified judges.”6 Likewise, in her comprehensive analysis of judicial pay, Comptroller Carole Keeton Strayhorn recognized that “Texas should ensure that its judiciary is qualified, experienced, stable and justly compensated.”7 And leaders in the legislature have begun the difficult task of crafting legislation designed with one goal – to assure that justice remains in capable hands.
Recommended publications
  • Elected Officials / Updated August 3, 2020
    ELECTED OFFICIALS / UPDATED AUGUST 3, 2020 FEDERAL ELECTED OFFICIALS OFFICE OFFICE HOLDER TERM PARTY EMAIL PHONE EXPIRES US President Donald J. Trump 2020 R https://www.whitehouse.gov/contact/ 202-456-1111 Vice-President Mike Pence 2020 R Senator John Cornyn 2020 R https://www.cornyn.senate.gov/ 202-224-2934 Senator Ted Cruz 2024 R https://www.cruz.senate.gov/ 202-224-5922 Congressman Roger Williams 2020 R https://williams.house.gov/ 202-225-9896 District 25 Congressman District 31 John Carter 2020 R https://carter.house.gov/ 202-225-3864 STATE ELECTED OFFICIALS OFFICE OFFICE HOLDER TERM PARTY EMAIL PHONE EXPIRES Governor Gregg Abott 2022 R https://gov.texas.gov/ 512-463-2000 Lt. Governor Dan Patrick 2022 R https:www.ltgov.state.tx.us/ 512-463-0001 Attorney General Ken Paxton 2022 R https://texasattorneygeneral.gov/ 512-463-2100 Comptroller of Public Accounts Glenn Heger 2022 R https://comptroller.texas.gov 800-252-1386 Commissioner of General Land Office George P. Bush 2022 R http://www.glo.texas.gov/ 512-463-5001 Commissioner Agriculture Sid Miller 2022 R http://texasagriculture.gov/ 512-463-7476 Railroad Commission of Texas Commissioner Wayne Christian 2022 R https://www.rrc.state.tx.us/about-us/commissioners/christian/ 512-463-7158 Commissioner Christi Craddick 2024 R https://www.rrc.state.tx.us/about-us/commissioners/craddick/ 512-463-7158 Commissioner Ryan Sitton 2020 R https://www.rrc.state.tx.us/about-us/commissioners/sitton/ 512-463-7158 ELECTED OFFICIALS / UPDATED AUGUST 3, 2020 STATE ELECTED OFFICIALS OFFICE OFFICE HOLDER TERM PARTY EMAIL PHONE EXPIRES Senator SD 24 Dawn Buckingham 2020 R https://senate.texas.gov.member.php?d+24 512-463-0124 Representative 54 Brad Buckley 2020 R https://house.texas.gov/members/member-page/email/?district=54&session=86 512-463-0684 Representative 55 Hugh Shine 2020 R https://house.texas.gov/members/member-page/email/?district=55&session=86 512-463-0630 State Board of Tom Maynard 2020 R [email protected] 512-763-2801 Education District 10 Supreme Court of Texas Chief Justice Nathan L.
    [Show full text]
  • Positioning Women to Win to Guide Me Through the Challenging Issues That Arise During My Campaign for Re-Election.”
    P o s i t ion i ng Wom e n to Wi n New Strategies for Turning Gender Stereotypes Into Competitive Advantages The Barbara Lee Family Foundation “Running my gubernatorial race was very different than running my previous race, and the Governor’s Guidebook series played an integral role in answering the questions I didn’t even know to ask. I will certainly rely on Positioning Women to Win to guide me through the challenging issues that arise during my campaign for re-election.” – Governor Christine Gregoire “Winning an election can never be taken for granted. The Governors Guidebook series arms both incumbents and first- time challengers with the “do’s” and “don’ts” of effectively communicating your achievements and vision. Leaders, regardless of gender, must develop a realistic and hopeful vision and be able to clearly articulate it to their supporters.” – Governor Linda Lingle P o s i t ion i ng Wom e n to Wi n New Strategies for Turning Gender Stereotypes Into Competitive Advantages DeDication Dedicated to the irrepressible spirit of the late Governor Ann Richards. acknowleDgements I would like to extend my deep appreciation to three extraordinary women who have served as Director at the Barbara Lee Family Foundation: Julia Dunbar, Amy Rosenthal and Alexandra Russell. I am also grateful for the support of the wonder women at “Team Lee”: Kathryn Burton, Moire Carmody, Hanna Chan, Monique Chateauneuf, Dawn Huckelbridge, Dawn Leaness, Elizabeth Schwartz, Mandy Simon and Nadia Berenstein. This guidebook would not have been possible without the vision and hard work of our political consultants and their staffs: Mary Hughes, Celinda Lake, Christine Stavem, Bob Carpenter and Pat Carpenter.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix A. Natioan Commission on Forensic Science Commissioners
    Reflecting Back—Looking Toward the Future: Appendix A Appendix A. National Commission on Forensic Science Commissioners and Biographies Co-Chairs: Arturo Casadevall, Ph.D. Marc LeBeau, Ph.D. Acting Deputy Attorney General Gregory Champagne Julia Leighton Dana J. Boente Cecelia Crouse, Ph.D. Hon. Bridget Mary McCormack Acting NIST Director and Under Gregory Czarnopys Peter Neufeld Secretary of Commerce for Standards & Technology Kent Deirdre Daly Phil Pulaski Rochford, Ph.D. M. Bonner Denton, Ph.D. Matthew Redle Vice-Chairs: Jules Epstein Sunita Sah, Ph.D. Nelson Santos John Fudenberg Michael “Jeff” Salyards, Ph.D. John Butler, Ph.D. S. James Gates, Jr., Ph.D. Ex-Officio Members: Commission Staff: Dean Gialamas Rebecca Ferrell, Ph.D. Jonathan McGrath, Ph.D. (DFO) Paul Giannelli David Honey, Ph.D. Danielle Weiss Randy Hanzlick, M.D. Marilyn Huestis, Ph.D. Lindsay DePalma Hon. Barbara Hervey Gerald LaPorte Susan Howley Commission Members: Patricia Manzolillo Ted Hunt Thomas Albright, Ph.D. Hon. Jed Rakoff Linda Jackson Suzanne Bell, Ph.D. Frances Schrotter Hon. Pam King Frederick Bieber, Ph.D. Kathryn Turman Troy Lawrence Former Chairs: Former Commission Members: James M. Cole Thomas Cech, Ph.D. Patrick Gallagher, Ph.D. William Crane Willie E. May, Ph.D. Vincent DiMaio, M.D. Sally Q. Yates Troy Duster, Ph.D. Andrea Ferreira-Gonzalez, Ph.D. Former Commission Staff: Andrew J. Bruck Stephen Fienberg, Ph.D. Robin Jones John Kacavas Brette Steele Ryant Washington Victor Weedn, M.D. Former Ex-Officio Members: Mark Weiss, Ph.D. 1 Reflecting Back—Looking Toward the Future: Appendix A NCFS Co-Chairs Dana J.
    [Show full text]
  • Lawnotes, the St. Mary's University School of Law Newsletter
    Digital Commons at St. Mary's University Law Notes School of Law Publications Fall 2009 LawNotes, The t.S Mary's University School of Law Newsletter St. Mary's University School of Law Follow this and additional works at: http://commons.stmarytx.edu/lawnotes Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation St. Mary's University School of Law, "LawNotes, The t.S Mary's University School of Law Newsletter" (2009). Law Notes. 17. http://commons.stmarytx.edu/lawnotes/17 This Newsletter is brought to you for free and open access by the School of Law Publications at Digital Commons at St. Mary's University. It has been accepted for inclusion in Law Notes by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons at St. Mary's University. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Fall 2009 law notesSt. Mary’s University | School of Law INSIDE: 2009 Distinguished Graduates New Deans » MAKING THEIR MARK Red Mass Alumni build prestige with success, giving back » continued p. 1 » A NOTE FROM THE DEAN Dear Fellow Graduates, We are in the middle of an exciting fall semester at your law school. You will be happy to know the new first year class is the top of the recruiting crop – in fact, according to academic quality indicators, it is the highest quality and most talented class of students we have ever had. One of the hallmarks of St. Mary’s University and the School of Law is small class sizes to provide for more personal attention and interaction between students and faculty. Beginning this fall, the School of Law has intentionally focused on reducing enrollment to concentrate on higher quality students and personal attention and overall success of every student.
    [Show full text]
  • Download Or Read It Here. May-June-2021-Issue
    TheThe TexasTexas The official journal of the Texas District and County Attorneys Association ProsecutorProsecutor May–June 2021 • Volume 51, Number 3 “It shall be the primary duty of all prosecuting attorneys … not to convict, but to see that justice is done.” Art. 2.01, Texas Code of Criminal Procedure The meaning of ‘material’ in Watkins v. State If you are a prosecutor, certainly you have heard of the Michael Morton Act. The Act has caused a significant change in the practice of all prosecu- tors and has impacted the workload of prosecutor office staff. But did you know the Michael Morton Act did not create By Alan Curry a new statute? The Michael Morton Act actually amended part of Texas’s discovery statute, which had been on the Assistant Criminal District Attorney in Galveston County books for decades, and it added several new subsections to it.1 The Michael Morton Act specifically amended Art. 39.14(a) of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure, which now The Michael Morton Act added several new types of evi- requires that the State produce, after a timely request from dence that the State is required to disclose, but—as you can the defendant, various pieces of “evidence material to any see—there has been no change to the language as to the na- matter involved in the action.”2 Prior to the enactment of the ture of the evidence that the State is required to produce. Michael Morton Act, Art. 39.14(a) had long required the State The State is, and always has been, required to produce “evi- to produce, “upon motion of the defendant showing good dence material to any matter involved in the action.” cause,” various pieces of “evidence material to any matter in- So if the Michael Morton Act is such a big deal—and it is— volved in the action.” that must be based upon some other addition to Art.
    [Show full text]
  • March 19,2007 the Honorable Susan Combs Opinion No. GA-053 1
    GREG ABBOTT March 19,2007 The Honorable Susan Combs Opinion No. GA-053 1 Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts Post Office Box 13528 Re: Application of section 103.001(b) of the Austin, Texas 7871 1-3528 Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code to a claim filed by one of the Tulia defendants (RQ-0523-GA) Dear Comptroller Combs: Your predecessor in office requested an opinion on the interpretation of Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code, section 103.OO 1(b).' Chapter 103 of the Civil Practice and Remedies Code provides for compensation to persons who have been wrongfully imprisoned. See TEX.CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE ANN. ch. 103 (Vernon 2005). Claims for compensation are filed with the Comptroller's judiciary section. See id. 5 103.051 (a). Section 103.001(a) states the criteria for entitlement to compensation for wrongful imprisonment while section 103.001(b) provides the following restriction on entitlement to compensation under section 103.OO 1(a): (b) A person is not entitled to compensation under Subsection (a) for any part of a sentence in prison during which the person was also serving a concurrent sentence for another crime to which Subsection (a) does not apply. Id. 5 103.001 The question about section 103.OO 1(b) arose in connection with a wrongful imprisonment compensation claim filed by a Tulia defendant. The request letter recited the well-publicized facts of the Tulia prosecutions: In July 1999, 46 individuals, nearly all African Americans, were arrested in Tulia by a local drug task force and charged with the sale of small amounts of cocaine.
    [Show full text]
  • The STATE of the JUDICIARY in Texas Chief Justice Wallace B
    The STATE OF THE JUDICIARY in Texas Chief Justice Wallace B. Jefferson Presented to the 81st Legislature February 11, 2009 Austin, Texas The STATE OF THE JUDICIARY in Texas Chief Justice Wallace B. Jefferson Presented to the 81st Legislature February 11, 2009 Austin, Texas THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS WALLACE B. JEFFERSON Justices Chief Justice NATHAN L. HECHT HARRIET O’NEILL DALE WAINWRIGHT SCOTT A. BRISTER DAVID M. MEDINA PAUL W. GREEN PHIL JOHNSON DON R. WILLETT THE TEXAS COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS SHARON KELLER Judges Presiding Judge LAWRENCE E. MEYERS TOM PRICE PAUL WOMACK CHERYL JOHNSON MICHAEL E. KEASLER BARBARA PARKER HERVEY CHARLES R. HOLCOMB CATHY COCHRAN Chief Justice Wallace B. Jefferson STATE OF THE JUDICIARY Presented to the 81st Legislature February 11, 2009 Austin, Texas Governor Perry, Lt. Governor Dewhurst, Speaker Straus, members of the Legislature, to my colleagues on the bench and most importantly, to the citizens of Texas, thank you for giving me an opportunity to speak with you today. These are critical times for Texas and for the nation. Now more than ever, the public relies on all branches of government to work together. That work begins here in the Capitol, in this chamber and in the Senate, where the Legislature crafts laws to promote the general welfare. Without the executive branch to enforce them, the laws may as well be written on sand. And unless the judiciary interprets the laws faithfully, the underpinning of our democracy – the rule of law – will falter. We each have an obligation to concentrate our energies on the first goal the United States Constitution articulates, and that is “to establish Justice.” Working together, we have made good progress toward that ideal.
    [Show full text]
  • Special Court of Review Vacates Public Warning, Charges Against Keller
    Case Closed: Special Court of Review Vacates Public Warning, Charges Against Keller By Mary Alice Robbins Texas Lawyer October 18, 2010 Breaking her silence after three years, Texas Court of Criminal Appeals Presiding Judge Sharon Keller says she feels "vindicated" by a special court of review's decision to vacate the State Commission on Judicial Conduct's public warning and charges against her. Although some reporters have written that the three-justice court of review's Oct. 11 decision in In Re: Honorable Sharon Keller was only a technical victory for Keller, she doesn't see it that way. "I won," Keller says. "People can call it what they want." Keller, a member of the CCA since 1995 and its presiding judge since 2000, also says she will seek re - election in 2012. "I have always planned on doing that," she says. Her judicial conduct case played out against the backdrop of debate over the death penalty. Dubbed "Sharon Killer" by some anti-death penalty activists, Keller has experienced not only the commission's investigation and prosecution of its charges against her but also critical media coverage and protests at her home. "It's been a three-year-long ordeal," Keller says. Austin solo Lillian Hardwick, co-author of the "Texas Handbook on Lawyer and Judicial Ethics," says what many people have focused on in Keller's case is the death penalty. "Make no mistake, the death penalty is a serious issue, but that's not what this is about," Hardwick says. Hardwick says, "It's whether what Judge Keller said and did on that day [Sept.
    [Show full text]
  • EAST TEXAS COLLEGE TOUR Thursday, Nov 7, 2019 Events: Angelina College, Stephen F
    EAST TEXAS COLLEGE TOUR Thursday, Nov 7, 2019 Events: Angelina College, Stephen F. Austin State University, Wiley College, Kilgore College, University of Texas at Tyler CONFIRMED CANDIDATES (listed alphabetically) Note: Tentative list (as of 10-27-2019), subject to change. Chris Bell: Candidate for Senate (Democratic Primary) Former Congressman Chris Bell is a native Texan, attorney, former US Congressman and Houston City Councilmember, husband, and father of two who is running for US Senate. Bell has decades of expe- rience in Texas Democratic politics, especially in Houston. He served on the City Council from 1997-2001, represented the area in the U.S. House from 2003-2005 and ran for governor in 2006. He was the Democratic nominee against then-Gov. Rick Perry, the Republican who won with 39% of the vote to Bell's 30%, while two independent candidates, Carole Keeton Strayhorn and Kinky Friedman, siphoned off the rest. Michael Cooper: Candidate for Senate (Democratic Primary) A former candidate for Lieutenant Govenor Michael Cooper is the President of the Beaumont NAACP. He earned a bachelor's degree in business and social studies from Lamar University Beaumont. Cooper's career experience includes working as a pastor at his local church, president of the South East Texas Toyota Dealers and in ex- ecutive management with Kinsel Motors. 936-250-1475 203 East Main, Suite 200, Nacogdoches, TX 75961 buildetx.org Hank Gilbert: Candidate for TX CD-1 (Democratic Primary) Hank Gilbert has lived in Congressional District 1 most of his life. A longtime rancher and successful small business owner, Hank spent many years watching our community be left behind.
    [Show full text]
  • Mental Health Summit Faculty Roster
    MENTAL HEALTH SUMMIT FACULTY ROSTER Brent Carr Steven Leifman Edward Spillane Judge Associate Administrative Judge Presiding Judge Tarrant County Criminal Court #9 Miami-Dade County Court, 11th College Station Municipal Court [email protected] Judicial Circuit of Florida 300 Krenek Tap Road 1351 N.W. 12th St. Rm. 617 College Station, TX 77842 Ann Collins Miami, FL 33125 979.764.3683 Judge 305.548.5394 [email protected] Fort Worth Municipal Court [email protected] 1000 Throckmorton St, Patti Tobias Fort Worth, TX 76102 David Newell Consultant 817.392.6715/4060 Judge National Center for State Courts [email protected] Texas Court of Criminal Appeals 707 17th Street, Suite 2900 | 201 W 14th St, Denver, CO 80202 Courtney Harvey Austin, TX 78701 303.308.4307 Forensic Director 512.463.1551 [email protected] Health and Human Services [email protected] Director Ryan Turner 909 W 45th Street, Bldg. 552| A.D. Paul General Counsel & Director of Austin, Texas, 78751 Sergeant Education 512.206.5237 Crisis Intervention Team Program TMCEC [email protected] Coordinator 2210 Hancock Drive Plano Police Department Austin, TX 78756 Ramey Heddins [email protected] 512.320.8274 Senior Director of Criminal Justice [email protected] MHMR Tarrant County J. Randall Price 3840 Hulen Street Price, Proctor & Associates, LLP Kristin Wade Fort Worth, TX 76107 [email protected] Judge 817.301.5102 County Court of Criminal [email protected] Gary Raney Appeals #1 Retired Sheriff Frank Crowley Courts Building, Barbara Hervey Ada County, Idaho 3rd Floor Judge 208.870.8400 Dallas, TX 75207 Texas Court of Criminal Appeals [email protected] 214.653.5705 201 W 14th St, [email protected] Austin, TX 78701 Brian Sims 512.463.1551 Senior Director of Medical and B.J.
    [Show full text]
  • JA2021-Issue
    TheThe TexasTexas The official journal of the Texas District and County Attorneys Association ProsecutorProsecutor July–August 2021 • Volume 51, Number 4 “It shall be the primary duty of all prosecuting attorneys … not to convict, but to see that justice is done.” Art. 2.01, Texas Code of Criminal Procedure New discovery rules for asset forfeitures When it comes to asset forfeitures, planning is the key to success. It sounds simple enough, but with the new discovery rules (effective Janu- ary 1, 2021) and a mere 30-day filing deadline, the challenge of successfully prosecuting forfeiture cases has By Jennifer Hebert grown. Assistant District Attorney in Brazos County Prosecutors are already juggling chaotic schedules with packed dockets (and backed-up dockets due to COVID-19) and crazy trial schedules, and law enforcement agencies are Knowing the rules overloaded with detectives who can hardly keep up with the Let’s start with the basics. What is asset forfeiture? Asset workload. So with all of these challenges, the question is, how forfeiture is a means by which law enforcement can legally can you successfully manage a forfeiture docket? take contraband from criminals through a civil process. While there isn’t an answer that works for everyone, each Contraband is defined by Texas law as property of any na- prosecutor has to find an efficient strategy or system that ture (including real, personal, tangible, or intangible) that works for the individual situation. What works in one office is used or intended to be used in the commission of, pro- or for one prosecutor may not work for someone else.
    [Show full text]
  • JCMH Bench Book
    Texas Mental Health and Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities Law Bench Book Judicial Commission on Mental Health Second Edition 2019-2020 This Bench Book is intended for educational and informational purposes only. It should not be construed as legal advice from the JCMH, or as an advisory opinion or ruling by the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals or the Supreme Court of Texas on specific cases or legal issues. Readers are responsible for consulting the statutes, rules, and cases pertinent to their issue or proceeding. Acknowledgements The Judicial Commission on Mental Health (JCMH) would like to recognize the leadership and support of Justice Jane Bland and Judge Barbara Hervey, Chairs of the JCMH; Justice Eva Guzman; Justice Jeff Brown; Bill Boyce, Vice-Chair of the JCMH; John Specia, JCMH Jurist in Residence; the Supreme Court of Texas; and the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals. The JCMH extends special thanks to the Supreme Court Children’s Commission, the Texas Municipal Courts Education Center, the Texas Association of Counties, the Texas Justice Court Training Center, and the Texas Center for the Judiciary. The JCMH would also like to recognize the following contributing authors and editors of this Bench Book: Hon. Camile DuBose, Chair Nelson Jarrin, J.D. Andrea Richardson 38th Judicial District Court Meadows Mental Health Policy Bluebonnet Trails Community Institute Services Bill Boyce, J.D. Alexander Dubose & Jefferson, Floyd Jennings, J.D., Ph.D. Sian Schilhab, J.D. LLP Harris County Public Texas Court of Criminal Defender’s Office Appeals Melinda Brents (Ret.) Harris County Attorney’s Office Lee Johnson, M.P.A.
    [Show full text]